westcliffe01
Well-Known Member
Hitting low with tumbling bullets should be obvious. The BC is only valid with the pointy end going downrange. The drag on a tumbling bullet will obviously be much higher..
I had that happen a few years back with my 300win deer hunting. I pulled up on a white-tail at about 200 paces.... Pull, miss... What, it's a chip shot??? Pull again, miss.... walk forward a few paces to where I could shoot without anything at all in the way ( first shots were over a bit of a grassy rise).... bang, flop.... I didn't see a single blade of grass in the scope, but the bullets were hitting the dirt before the critter.Is there any possibility that the bullet may be striking grass or brush either near the shooting position or near the target ? Often at the shooting position the scope may have a clear field of view when the barrel does not...
Well, I'm still not sure what the problem is. Been checking around with some of my friends/gunshops to see if anyone has a bore scope. It's possible the barrel is shot; it is a 6.5-284, I do run it at the upper limit of pressure and I have 700 rounds through it. Jury's still out. JohnnyK.
Well, I'm still not sure what the problem is. Been checking around with some of my friends/gunshops to see if anyone has a bore scope. It's possible the barrel is shot; it is a 6.5-284, I do run it at the upper limit of pressure and I have 700 rounds through it. Jury's still out. JohnnyK.
If the problem persists, you could try Tubbs Final Finish system. I've been tempted to use it with some of my former barrels but always decided to rebarrel instead.
I used the Tubbs FF on the original 270 AM barrel. The Tubbs FF definitely brought the barrel back to it's at least 0.5 MOA ....... for exactly 20 shots. Then Kaput for sure!
Hey Roy, what was your final round count on your 270 Allen mag?
Checked the crown and that appears good but on the seating depth; something's amiss.
Back in July 2013 my journal shows 2.5550" as the seating depth for the 140gn A-Max.
Just checked it again and I'm getting 2.5425". That's .0125" shallower. Could that be "the" carbon ring?
(Quote )
Maybe.
I have had weird readings and became frustrated, then I re-cleaned and then got reasonable readings.
If you have a different lot# of Amaxs then the measurement will most likely change. Copy?